Mr IAN MACFARLANE (12:58 PM) —I join with the member for Calare in his comments with regard to how the issue of child support in general impacts on an average politician's electorate office. If I were to pick the top five issues, CSA issues would rank in the top two. It is an issue, which, unfortunately, is part of the reality of modern Australia—in fact, the modern world. I must admit I was surprised to see some statistics as I researched this speech that showed that, in this day and age, we have nearly one million children living with one natural parent and another natural parent living elsewhere, and that there are in fact 860,000 fathers in Australia not living with their children. This is an issue which of course will not go away. Based on more recent trends it is an issue on which we are going to continue to see the statistics grow. It is an issue that I think that we as a society must have far greater interest in and play a far greater role in if we are to bring up the next generation of children in as stable an environment as we possibly can.

It is an area that is extraordinarily difficult to come to terms with and it is a very sad area. For those children affected by marital or relationship breakup, we, as a government and a parliament, need to take whatever steps we can to ensure that the children affected by the deterioration of these relationships are given every means of support, guidance and counselling that we can possibly give them. It is an area that unfortunately also sees great anger between the separated partners. One of the objectives of these amendments is to try to assist people to adjust, emotionally in particular but also financially, to the new regime of living separately from each other and separately from their children.

Speaking in support of the Child Support Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2000, I am eager to point out that this bill represents yet another significant move by the federal government to provide a fair system for the benefit of the men and women of Australia, and, importantly, for the benefit of their children. I constantly receive, as I am sure the member for Calare does, letters and visits from constituents who say the system is not working. The aim of this legislation is to bring about a fairer system, a system in which there is more opportunity for people to comply, particularly voluntarily, to ensure the wellbeing of children. We see situations where there is non-payment of child support, where the custodial parent does not abide by Family Court rulings in terms of access, where resentment continues to grow and fester. The people who really get hurt in that situation are, of course, the children. This legislation aims to address some of those areas.

In recognising the rights and needs of resident and nonresident parents who separate for a wide variety of reasons, the bill gives effect to four key measures relating to child support announced as part of the government's 2000-01 budget. Each measure has been developed as part of an overall package that addresses key issues for the wellbeing of Australian families following separation. It provides a fairer basis for determining assistance to children of second families and encourages parents to maintain contact with their children. The package is supported by and complements the Stronger Families and Communities Strategy, which will address the local needs of families and communities through a wide range of prevention initiatives.

One of the things I am pleased to see in this bill is an initiative which will allow people to move on in their lives, particularly men—most nonresident parents are men—who find themselves able to start a new life with a new partner and a new family. As the member for Calare said, these men are able to supplement their finances, although he was marginally mistaken in terms of the amount of income that can be excluded. There is the opportunity under this legislation for a father to go out, earn income and bolster the income of his new family without that being stripped away in additional child support payments. One thing we always need to do in legislation in Australia is to keep, in whatever we do, the incentive for people to do more to look after their own situation, to improve their own wellbeing and to have the opportunity to better their own lives.

It is anticipated that these reforms will build on reforms that have already been made to child support schemes and make them more flexible and responsible in particular situations. The balance between the needs of those who pay child support and those who receive child support has shifted. There have been increasing measures to help second families of those who pay child support as well as to set the formula for adjusting those payments. That is basically what is entailed in this legislation.

The child support maintenance formula makes no allowance for shared care cases where one parent provides less than 30 per cent care to the child, which is particularly the case for nonresident parents who have access every second weekend and half of the school holidays. That formula is not uncommon in rulings handed down by the Family Court, and the numerical result of that is around 22 per cent. Those parents who take on the responsibility and who wish to maintain contact with their children through that process of every second weekend and half of the school holidays get no acknowledgment under the existing system for the time they have the children and no financial incentive to do it. While I am sure that in most cases parents take on these arrangements to maintain contact with their children, I think at the same time we need to applaud and encourage this.

The measures being introduced today that have been outlined by a number of preceding speakers will recognise the contribution that the non-custodial parent makes and will hopefully encourage more nonresident parents to maintain contact with their children. Again, if I go back to the earlier statistics that I quoted, one of the problems we are facing in society, particularly for young boys, is the lack of a male role model in their life. It is therefore important that we provide incentives to encourage the fathers of separated families to keep up their involvement with their sons and daughters, to keep up their part in raising balanced, healthy young children and young adults. Right down to 10 per cent contact there will be a change in the formula as it relates to child support payments. The cost to the federal government of this initiative is some $47½ million over four years. With the legislative amendment, the government is also working to lower the cap—and I have heard some discussion about the cap and its potential to impact on CSA payments to the residential parent.

Can I just say that part of the aim of any legislation has to be that the legislation is fair and that it can be justified, and the justification in a nonresident parent paying more to the custodial parent than it actually costs to support and raise that child makes any discussion of fairness on the issue of child support very difficult. What we have done through investigating this issue is to establish the real cost and the real cap that is required. So we have introduced a cap that instead of being set at 2½ times average weekly earnings for full employees will now be lowered.

Although it only affects one per cent of our population, I have no problem with moves to bring about fairness. I think one of the problems I often have when I speak in this chamber is hearing comments from the other side that are targeted at our high achievers in Australia, and high income earners are our high achievers. It is symptomatic of a tall poppy syndrome which I would very much like to see dismissed from this great country that we live in. Just because someone earns a lot of money, they should not be dragged down or be excluded from reform. In addressing this issue of the cap and how people on high incomes are treated under child support, I think the government should be applauded and supported by all sides for bringing some fairness and equity into the system.

We heard some comments in relation to trusts from the member for Calare. Hardly a time goes by when we do not hear something from the other side about tax avoidance and what we are not doing about it. Of course the reality is that the government is introducing some very significant changes on trusts. We are introducing a system where we will be able to identify the beneficiaries of trusts and their income. I thought the member for Calare would probably be aware when he talked about expensive luxury company cars that of course company car benefits are now shown on the group certificate and do have a direct impact, particularly in the area of child support payments.

I think the lowering of the cap to $78,378 from $101,153 under current arrangements will be applauded in the community. The average weekly earnings figure that sets the cap on the payer taxable income that is subject to child support formula assessment will be aligned with that used for the payee's disregarded income figure. Sure it is only one per cent, but it does result in the lower cap and thousands of child support payers will benefit from it.

The issue of the income from second families is one which again the member for Calare raised. It is an issue which I personally am very keen to see progressed. All too often as the separated parent tries to rebuild his or her life, we have a situation where their net income levels are so low that it is difficult for them to establish that new life and, when they have a family of their own, very difficult for them to actually regain their position and wellbeing. What we have agreed to in this legislation and what is proposed in this legislation is a situation where extra income not directly related to income already earned will be able to be earned up to a level of 30 per cent of the existing child support assessment. This gives an initiative for the non-custodial parent to earn some extra income, knowing full well that after they have paid tax they will be able to use that income either to support themselves or, more likely, their new family. This again is going to be well received in the community. It comes at a cost to the government, because we will need to increase the payments to custodial parents as a consequence, and that cost will come at about $2.4 million a year. I just was not quite sure when the member for Lilley was talking about custodial parents losing out under this system whether he was fully aware of that. The federal government has moved to bridge some of the drop in the custodial parent's income through extra assistance. That is something again that we need to applaud.

The tax deductibility and the family tax benefit of the child-care benefit will also be changed under this legislation. We heard previous speakers applaud it; the member for Calare applauded it. The move from 50 per cent to 100 per cent will be welcomed across the board. It again comes at a cost to government, but government here, as I say from the outset, is attempting to give non-custodial parents who establish new families an opportunity to re-establish their lives. This increase in the deductibility to 100 per cent is an extremely valuable benefit which is worth about $4.5 million a year to families.

Finally, to assist nonresident parents—and I spoke earlier of this—o improve their post-separation relationship parenting skills, two pilot programs worth a total of $600,000 will be offered. One will be via an advisory service attached to the Men's Access Line and one by face-to-face community based advisers. As the House must surely see, the measures contained in this bill are bound to ensure the payment of a fairer and more feasible child support system for the benefit of all parties involved.

Media reports soon after the budget suggested that groups representing payers were pleased with the government policy direction. In fact, Lone Parent Association President Barry Williams was reported to be amazed at the success of his lobbying. I am, of course, very pleased to be able to debate a bill which pleasantly amazes members of our community. But the Child Support Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 2) 2000 is not necessarily amazing; it is simply fair. In providing for our children and the future of Australia, it is vital that this government offers support in the form of a balanced and just system to benefit all concerned. The bill supports that notion and I commend it to the House.